Comments

I have a question about the suicide rate. Is it the truth that there is correlation between gun and suit side rate? I mean during exam, can I make up some 'research results' , even they are not back by any evident?

Nobody will check the accuracy of your ideas, so you can make things up if you want. I think I found the information about the suicide rate on Wikipedia, so it may or may not be true. However, it's good language so it doesn't really matter.

Hi Simon,
If the question asks u strictly
is it a positive or negative development ?
for example..due to computers,people started working from home and children can study at homes..... is it a positive or negative development?
can i write both sides....of view?and conclude that up to a certain extent...?a little confusion about intro too...
i will appreciate ur kind help...thanks a lot,sir.

Carrying a gun is crucial in controlling violent societies but it has many drawbacks in terms of danger, availability and accidents. Some society have accessibility to weapon tools either legally or illegally therefore, carrying weapon by police is essential to protect other people who do not carry guns. Nevertheless, it is dangerous to have guns; the reason is that people might use it illogically. For example., Being threatened by police guns might contribute to using guns by people to defend upon themselves, killed and injured causalities are the outcome of this attitude.

Although possessing gun could be dangerous, however there are some advantages too. In some countries people are allowed to own firearms with license. They can use the guns as self defence and protect themselves not only from human but also from wild animals. This inturns will deter the crime rate. Further more some poeple own armaments as a passion and hobby so it is not justfied that gun are only used for committing crimes.

Hi, Simon
I have a suggestion and a favor to ask of you. Is it possible for you to help us to interpret some questions both from the speaking module and from the writing module?
Coz I have found that for us who study English as a second language, sometimes it is difficult to interpret the IELTS writing and speaking questions. For example, in my culture, if I am asked to describe a successful person, I might describe my father who is successful because he has a happy family and a reasonable career, which is, as far as I know, not what the question is intended to ask. Also, in the writing module, the following question confuses me for a long time.
QUESTION1:In some countries, small town-centre shops are out of business because people are driving to large out-of-town stores. As a result, people without cars have limited access to shops, so more and more people buy cars. Do you think advantages of this development outweigh disadvantages?
I do not know what the development is and what I should focus on.

QUESTION2
Some people have prejudice about international travel. What are the causes and how can they become more open-minded about international tourism?
What prejudice do people have? They look down upon tourism?

1. I think your answer about your father is fine if you explain that you consider happiness and family to be parts of what it means to be successful.

2. Yes, it's a bit confusing. I think you have to take 'the development' to mean the whole situation i.e. the large shopping centres are affecting the numbers of cars and drivers. The problem is that this question isn't written well - I think someone has remembered it wrongly, or it comes from a source that isn't an official IELTS source. Questions in the real exam are always much clearer.

3. This question also seems to come from an unofficial source - I can't imagine Cambridge writing "people have prejudice about international travel". Anyway, I think the question just wants you to give the reasons why some people don't like the idea of going abroad.

Just to summarise, I think the reason why many questions seem hard to interpret is that they are badly written (because a student remembered them wrongly, or someone invented them). "Real" IELTS questions are always easier to interpret.

I wrote the paragraph based on your ideas(didn't look at your sample paragraph):

There are a number of reasons why the ownership of guns should be controlled. The first one is that owning guns usually leads to a high risk of accidents, and it also poses great danger to children if they have access to guns. Another cause is that there will probably be more violent crimes because more criminals will use guns. And to tackle this problem, police will also need guns and there will be a lot of gun battles between criminals and police. The third reason that should not be overlooked is the higher suicide rates caused by owing guns. All in all, it is needless to say that guns create violent societies and they definitely should be under control.

My pattern in this paragraph is: Topic sentence + 3 reasons + last sentence refer back to the TS(All in all, it is needless to say that guns create violent societies and they definitely should be under control)

What do you think about this paragraph? After reading your blog, I tried to use simple words to express ideas and pay more attention to the paragraph structure and real ideas.

Hi Simon，thank you for sharing so such useful information. I have learnt a lot from this website.

I have some confusion about this paragraph: In my opionion, the structure of this paraparaph is topic sentence+ 3 reasons + conclusion. However, I think the conclusion (All in all, gun control advocates believe that guns create violent societies with high murder rates) is only closely related to reason no.2(They also argue that the number of violent crimes... ), but not so closely to reason no.1(accidents with guns),or reason no.3(suicide rates), beacause accidents and suicide are not murder. Is it better if we just say 'All in all, gun control advocates believe that guns create violent societies'?